ASHOK MAHADEO KOLI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused has challenged his conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence to life imprisonment. The allegation agains;t the accused is that he killed his wife by throttling her on 5-5-2001. The accused was arrested soon after the body of the deceased was found and was tried before the Sessions Court in sessions Case No. 169 of 2001. The prosecution has relied on 12 witnesses to substantiate its case before the trial Court. The prosecution has alleged that the accused who was a labourer was married to the deceased and had a six year old son. His addiction to alcohol left him with insufficient funds to run the house. He often sent Vaishali, his wife and son back to her parental home. Vaishali's father used to supply provisions in order to help the accused make two ends meet. According to the prosecution, the accused often quarrelled with his wife which provoked the father of Vaishali to complain to the father of the accused about his son's conduct. The father of the accused provided him a room near his house at Shivanakwadi. Vaishali and their son Prashant started residing in the new house alongwith the accused. However, as old habits die hard, the accused went back to his earlier ways. Vaishali and her son returned to her father's house and continued to stay there. On 30-4-2001, the accused brought Vaishali from her father's house to their matrimonial home, after assuring her father that he would treat her properly in future. Their son prashant continued to reside with the maternal grandfather. The case of the prosecution is that on 5-5-2001 between 3 and 4 am Vaishali was found dead. Vaishali's body was found by the mother of the accused who stayed close to them. She woke up her husband and other son deepak. Deepak then sent a message to vaishali's father about her death. Vaishali's father and other relatives came to her house at about 8 in the morning. According to the prosecution, the accused on being questioned by Vaishali's father informed him that he had throttled Vaishali since she had rebuffed his sexual advances.

(2.) The prosecution in order to prove its case against the accused, examined his mother as P. W. 4. This witness has turned hostile. P. W. 3, the brother of the accused has also turned hostile. However, both these witnesses have spoken about the strained relations between Vaishali and the accused. P. W. 4 has in fact stated that she saw the accused outside his house in the morning between 4. 30 and 5 a. m. on 5-5-2001. She questioned the accused of the whereabouts of vaishali. As he did not answer she followed him into his house and found Vaishali dead. However, the evidence of these witnesses is not very helpful to the prosecution, both the witnesses having turned hostile.

(3.) Panch witness, P. W. 1, has spoken about the extra judicial confession of the accused to her. This witness has stated in detail about the manner in which the dead body of the victim was found. A scarf was tied around the neck of the victim. The witness was asked to untie the knot of the scarf and it was noticed that there were black marks around the neck. This witness has been cross-examined in great detail. However, her credibility has not been shaken.